Now that the Palestinians have a de facto state at the United Nations, its
title could become a key element of the propaganda war in the Middle East.

The official designation of the new “non-member observer state”, approved by an overwhelming majority of the UN general assembly on Thursday night, is “Palestine”.

Having pulled off a major diplomatic coup against the United States and Israel with the vote itself, it would be a further triumph for the Palestinians if this single, historically potent word entered popular usage.

Until now, “Palestine” has been used mostly by the Palestinians and activists supporting their quest for an independent homeland to stress the fact of their statelessness.

There has in fact never been a nation state called Palestine. The Holy Land has rather been a region or province under Roman, Byzantine, Ottoman and British rule, to name but a few.

In 1947 the British Mandate for Palestine was broken up by United Nations resolution 181 into a Jewish and Arab state. The Jews accepted the deal, giving birth to Israel; the Arabs did not, and the two sides have been fighting ever since, most recently this month in Gaza.

Western governments and media often refer to the “Palestinian territories” or separately to the West Bank and Gaza, the two non-contiguous territories that would make up a fully-fledged state.

The nomenclature preferred by the Foreign Office is the “Occupied Palestinian Territories”, which is unlikely to change quickly, according to officials. Even that however is arguably inaccurate, since Gaza has not been occupied by Israel since 2005.

The Palestinian Authority, which only controls the West Bank, is another common moniker. Often, “the Palestinians” is utilised, sometimes excessively. Some reports use all of the above, possibly to the confusion of the reader.

“Palestine” is not in fact a new designation at the UN. It was awarded to the Palestine Liberation Organisation mission in 1988, when the PLO held “permanent observer” status, first granted in 1974.

The world paid little attention to that re-classification 24 years ago, but now that the word “state” is included in the Palestinians’ new standing, putting them on a par with the Vatican, that could change.

However, is it helpful to use the term “Palestine” henceforth when the Palestinian Authority and the militant Hamas, which runs Gaza, are such bitter opponents - though the UN bid has brought signs of a rapprochement.

If those two groups cannot reconcile in the interests of peace, do they merit being commonly described as a single entity? Will widespread usage of the term have to wait for full independence, if and when that is achieved?